Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 51 posts

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#21

Post by rhino369 »

desdiv wrote: post #2

Northrop Grumman seriously paid for a Super Bowl ad? Oh sure, next time I'm out shopping for a long range stealth bomber maybe I'll subconsciously remember the ad and choose a Northrop Grumman one. I've been a long time Boeing-Lockheed customer but the powerful imagery from that ad left quite the impression on me. I get that defense officials and congressmen watch the Super Bowl, but there must be more cost effective…

Northrop and a whole bunch of contractors advertize on the DC subway line that runs to the pentagon. It's pretty funny.

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#22

Post by adventured »

venomsnake wrote: post #8

Isn't the future in 3d printed automated drones, with absurdly low cost, that can saturate any defense.

The problem with such drones, is distance. Let's say Iran decides to take that approach. Then the question is: how far can they push those armed drones out from their operating bases. The answer is: not very far.

So no, drones saturating defenses isn't a serious threat to nations or regional strength, only to very specific targets that are nearby (eg an aircraft carrier & crew dumb enough to park off the coast of Iran, after they acquire such drone technology, and assuming the US has developed no defense for such).

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#23

Post by jacquesm »

adventured wrote: post #19
smhinsey wrote: post #17

So what happens if we find ourselves in a war of attrition again? Most/all of the potential opponents in such a war are nuclear powers so it's theoretically not a possibility but history is littered with theoretical impossibilities made real. It seems like we have all of these incredibly dominant and expensive weapons but only a relatively tiny supply, no timely and cost-effective way to replace losses, and not many…

The other major nuclear powers are no more capable of fighting a war of attrition than the US is. Further, the US is highly unlikely to be dumb enough to fight a war in China or Russia. That would require ten million soldiers just to get started anyway. It simply isn't going to happen, any more than Russia or China are going to cross the Pacific or Atlantic and invade the US. China has very little capability to proje…

Another way to look at those bases is to think of them as already captive American troops. You can project power all you want but if your runway has been bombed you're not going anywhere. Having your troops stationed the world over is both an advantage and a disadvantage, it allows your enemies to strike you the world over rather than just on your own soil.

See: USS Cole, Ein al-Asad and so on.

As for the US's ability to strike perpetually at foreign targets: that's limited to those targets that the US does not depend on in any economic capacity and only holds true as long as oil flows.

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#24

Post by enraged_camel »

c-slice wrote: post #12
tree_of_item wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the signaling value: Northrop Grumman is not a small shop, and wants to show these officials and congressman that they're the real deal and have plenty of money to spend on flashy and super expensive things like Super Bowl ads.

I think this is completely PR - they want to create buzz and excitement in the public for the "hot new spy plane" such that its politically impossible for congress to cancel the program/cut the budget.

I doubt it. There is a ton of war-weariness these days, and expensive military projects aren't very popular. Especially considering the utter fiasco that is the F-35 program, I really doubt the public is in the mental or emotional state to support another pricey project.

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#25

Post by hessenwolf »

adventured wrote: post #19
smhinsey wrote: post #17

So what happens if we find ourselves in a war of attrition again? Most/all of the potential opponents in such a war are nuclear powers so it's theoretically not a possibility but history is littered with theoretical impossibilities made real. It seems like we have all of these incredibly dominant and expensive weapons but only a relatively tiny supply, no timely and cost-effective way to replace losses, and not many…

The other major nuclear powers are no more capable of fighting a war of attrition than the US is. Further, the US is highly unlikely to be dumb enough to fight a war in China or Russia. That would require ten million soldiers just to get started anyway. It simply isn't going to happen, any more than Russia or China are going to cross the Pacific or Atlantic and invade the US. China has very little capability to proje…

America is unlikely to be dumb enough to fight a war in China and Russia, but a proxy war with China and/or Russia is likely. Russia had some key victories with really simple mass produced blanket bombing kit, simple tanks, ak47s, etc (there to be good at putting old crap together to build your solution: находчиво (nahohdchihvy)).

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#26

Post by hessenwolf »

venomsnake wrote: post #14
ojbyrne wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Absurdly low cost" won't work with the giant welfare system that is the DoD.

There are nations that have the outdated ideas of winning wars and not stimulating the economy ... for them the ideas of mass produced drones built at BOM, with some stolen IP from US are tempting.

Wasn't war always about stealing people's stuff or preventing your stuff from being stolen? I mean, my country had independence wars every generation for 800 years, but they were all about not getting our potatoes robbed.

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#28

Post by venomsnake »

adventured wrote: post #22
venomsnake wrote: post #8

Isn't the future in 3d printed automated drones, with absurdly low cost, that can saturate any defense.

The problem with such drones, is distance. Let's say Iran decides to take that approach. Then the question is: how far can they push those armed drones out from their operating bases. The answer is: not very far. So no, drones saturating defenses isn't a serious threat to nations or regional strength, only to very specific targets that are nearby (eg an aircraft carrier & crew dumb enough to park off the coast of Ira…

The problems with such drones is not distance. When you remove the whole wetware, and the systems to keep it alive you can reduce the weight of the aircraft substantially.

Also it is threat for exactly the regional powers. Iran does not care about US, it cares for Iraq, Israel, Saudy Arabia, Egypt and Syria.

Re: Pentagon’s $55B mystery plane is secret, but debate on cost is appearing

#30

Post by venomsnake »

_yosefk wrote: post #16
ricardobeat wrote: post #10

Did I seriously just read a cry for "disrupting the combat aircraft market"? How about disrupting the tobacco business? Disrupting human traffic? Exaggerations aside, not everything is about making (or saving) money. I sure as hell don't want military weapons to become the latest startup trend.

I can see how we'd be better off without human trafficking and, to a smaller extent, without the tobacco business. I'm not sure we'd be better off without weapons. In fact, if the club became world's most advanced weapon tomorrow, it would, among other things, likely boost human trafficking.

We cannot be without weapons. Ever. A smart person could weaponize everything. That is the whole point of the brain evolving. It is in our DNA.
Post reply on HN